181 lines
11 KiB
JSON
181 lines
11 KiB
JSON
{
|
|
"classifier": "triage_classify.py",
|
|
"seed": "inbox/seed-2026-09-26.json",
|
|
"total": 13,
|
|
"counts": {
|
|
"archive_fix": 8,
|
|
"app_pr": 3,
|
|
"general": 2
|
|
},
|
|
"results": [
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 13,
|
|
"source": "decided",
|
|
"summary": "Archive fix: magazine-091 lists Strategy among compared firms",
|
|
"evidence": "Flag 7 of 7. Grade: overstated.\n\nSummary clause: \"Comparing Strategy, Twenty One, Nakamoto, Metaplanet, Coinsilium and Smarter Web returns and drawdowns against Bitcoin\".\n\nArticle: \"We set aside pioneers like Strategy, which started in 2020 and is up over 400% since, as it's not a fair comp for these newcomers.\" Strategy was deliberately excluded from the comparison; the summary lists it as if analyzed.\n\nProposed correction: drop Strategy from the compared list.",
|
|
"category": "archive_fix",
|
|
"decision": "approved",
|
|
"rule": {
|
|
"category": "archive_fix",
|
|
"decision": "approved",
|
|
"decision_detail": "already resolved in the seed (approved)"
|
|
}
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 1,
|
|
"source": "pending",
|
|
"summary": "Archive fix: magazine-021 says only Loko and Happy responded",
|
|
"evidence": "Flag 3 of 7. Grade: contradicted.\n\nSummary clause: \"(only Loko and Happy responded)\".\n\nArticle: \"Then after a few minutes I checked the chat. A few positive responses. Some funny shit talking, oh look, Happy even added some lyrics!\" - more than two people responded; \"only\" is wrong.\n\nProposed correction: \"(Loko and Happy among those who responded)\".",
|
|
"category": "archive_fix",
|
|
"decision": "approve",
|
|
"rule": {
|
|
"category": "archive_fix",
|
|
"decision": "article-grounded correction",
|
|
"decision_detail": "article-grounded correction published to the live page"
|
|
}
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 2,
|
|
"source": "pending",
|
|
"summary": "Turd app: approve pushing branch zephyrus/62-symptom-escalation-regression",
|
|
"evidence": "Local branch, committed, not pushed. Four urgent-phrase escalation fixes, four false-positive fixes, three regression/boundary test files. npm test 92/92 on 2026-09-20. Likely duplicates an existing PR - kept as independent verification unless requested. No push without maintainer approval per your authority rules.",
|
|
"category": "app_pr",
|
|
"decision": "table",
|
|
"rule": {
|
|
"category": "app_pr",
|
|
"decision": "wait for authorization",
|
|
"decision_detail": "awaiting Alexander/maintainer authorization"
|
|
}
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 3,
|
|
"source": "pending",
|
|
"summary": "Archive fix: magazine-011 calls John the 'founder' of Proof of Ink",
|
|
"evidence": "Flag 2 of 7. Grade: unsupported.\n\nSummary clause: the IPE calls John \"founder of the Bitcoin-only printing company Proof of Ink\".\n\nThe article never uses the word \"founder\"; byline is \"Proof of Ink by -John\". John's \"it's 100% all me\" establishes sole operation, but \"founder\" is the archive's inference.\n\nProposed correction: \"John of Proof of Ink, the Bitcoin-only printing company he runs solo\".",
|
|
"category": "archive_fix",
|
|
"decision": "approve",
|
|
"rule": {
|
|
"category": "archive_fix",
|
|
"decision": "article-grounded correction",
|
|
"decision_detail": "article-grounded correction published to the live page"
|
|
}
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 4,
|
|
"source": "pending",
|
|
"summary": "Turd app: approve submitting the a11y PR from zephyrus/65-a11y-gates",
|
|
"evidence": "Local branch, commit 03def65, not pushed. Accessibility changes plus eight Playwright gates. Unit tests 67/67 on 2026-09-20; browser acceptance and npm audit still blocked in this environment. Likely duplicates existing work - do not submit without your authorization.",
|
|
"category": "app_pr",
|
|
"decision": "table",
|
|
"rule": {
|
|
"category": "app_pr",
|
|
"decision": "wait for authorization",
|
|
"decision_detail": "awaiting Alexander/maintainer authorization"
|
|
}
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 5,
|
|
"source": "pending",
|
|
"summary": "Turd app: approve pushing branch zephyrus/67-hard-stool-followup",
|
|
"evidence": "Local branch, commit b730f5f, not pushed. Explicit Type 1-2 follow-up question; no image inference. npm test 75/75 on 2026-09-20. Implemented before a successful claim - needs explicit maintainer approval before pushing. Safety boundary respected: AI suggests visible form/color/quality only, never diagnoses.",
|
|
"category": "app_pr",
|
|
"decision": "table",
|
|
"rule": {
|
|
"category": "app_pr",
|
|
"decision": "wait for authorization",
|
|
"decision_detail": "awaiting Alexander/maintainer authorization"
|
|
}
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 6,
|
|
"source": "pending",
|
|
"summary": "Archive fix: magazine-011 says merch was made for the Boston Bitcoin Festival",
|
|
"evidence": "Flag 1 of 7 from the Q8 summary-fidelity pilot (recoveries/summary-fidelity-pilot.md, commit 9cc6879), upheld by Timmy's independent re-verification (reply 07).\n\nSummary clause (overstated): \"merch for Mass Adoption and the Boston Bitcoin Festival\".\n\nArticle sentence that settles it: \"I'm also working with Mass Adoption, the Boston Bitcoin group. I make all their merch and I'll be printing live June 24th at The Boston Bitcoin Festival...\"\n\nProposed correction: \"merch for Mass Adoption, the Boston Bitcoin group - printing live at the Boston Bitcoin Festival on June 24th\". The merch is for Mass Adoption; the festival is where he printed live.",
|
|
"category": "archive_fix",
|
|
"decision": "approve",
|
|
"rule": {
|
|
"category": "archive_fix",
|
|
"decision": "article-grounded correction",
|
|
"decision_detail": "article-grounded correction published to the live page"
|
|
}
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 7,
|
|
"source": "pending",
|
|
"summary": "Archive fix: magazine-061 misattributes the centerfold reference",
|
|
"evidence": "Flag 6 of 7. Grade: overstated (minor).\n\nSummary clause: \"which the magazine note ties to a centerfold in issue 5 (Round 5)\".\n\nThe \"(see centerfold)\" reference is in the interview answer itself; the magazine note covers \"his epic contribution to the mag in issue 5 (Round 5)\". Attribution is wrong though the fact is supported.\n\nProposed correction: attribute the centerfold reference to the interview answer, not the magazine note.",
|
|
"category": "archive_fix",
|
|
"decision": "approve",
|
|
"rule": {
|
|
"category": "archive_fix",
|
|
"decision": "article-grounded correction",
|
|
"decision_detail": "article-grounded correction published to the live page"
|
|
}
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 8,
|
|
"source": "pending",
|
|
"summary": "Trial by Timmy: send Timmy the local-inference trial brief for your Mac",
|
|
"evidence": "Your standing goal: Timmy running fully local on open-weight models, zero dependence on any company's inference API. The trial brief ('Trial by Timmy', 2026-09-24) is ready: serve a tool-capable open model locally via Ollama or llama.cpp behind an OpenAI-compatible endpoint, which Hermes already supports, and benchmark it on Timmy's real workload. Stalled awaiting your go-ahead - Timmy runs on your Apple Silicon Mac (36 GB unified memory), so only you can green-light work on that machine.",
|
|
"category": "general",
|
|
"decision": "table",
|
|
"rule": {
|
|
"category": "general",
|
|
"decision": "wait for authorization",
|
|
"decision_detail": "awaiting Alexander/maintainer authorization"
|
|
}
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 9,
|
|
"source": "pending",
|
|
"summary": "Q9: hand unreleased audio to Timmy under checksum for independent QC",
|
|
"evidence": "Q9 (independent music QC) is not executable as a genuine second opinion from Zephyrus's environment - same host, same tools, and he wrote the item. Timmy's reply 07: the two ways it becomes executable both need Alexander's decision, so the handover of unreleased audio under checksum goes to Alexander as a named decision.\n\nThree wording corrections stay openly logged regardless: <= -0.9 dBFS vs a -1.0 dBTP target; \"the manifest\" is STATE.json; 195.0 s is the FLAC source, MP3 container reads 195.024 s.",
|
|
"category": "general",
|
|
"decision": "table",
|
|
"rule": {
|
|
"category": "general",
|
|
"decision": "wait for authorization",
|
|
"decision_detail": "awaiting Alexander/maintainer authorization"
|
|
}
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 10,
|
|
"source": "pending",
|
|
"summary": "Archive fix: magazine-061 claims a 'weekly Thursday intelligence-style cadence'",
|
|
"evidence": "Flag 5 of 7. Grade: unsupported.\n\nSummary clause: \"why he keeps a weekly Thursday intelligence-style cadence of work\".\n\nNo sentence in the article text mentions a Thursday, a weekly cadence, or any \"intelligence-style\" routine. Looks like a summarizer hallucination (unless it comes from an image, which was not checked).\n\nProposed correction: delete the clause.",
|
|
"category": "archive_fix",
|
|
"decision": "approve",
|
|
"rule": {
|
|
"category": "archive_fix",
|
|
"decision": "article-grounded correction",
|
|
"decision_detail": "article-grounded correction published to the live page"
|
|
}
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 11,
|
|
"source": "pending",
|
|
"summary": "Archive fix: magazine-040 'last block he mined' sentence replacement",
|
|
"evidence": "From the Q4 falsification pass (recoveries/falsification-pass.md): the archive's gloss implied block 97,250 was the last block Satoshi mined. Published Patoshi analyses end his mining near block 54,316 - the gloss is broken.\n\nTimmy's proposed replacement sentence (reply 05):\n\n\"It closes with Satoshi resting on the 97,250th block - the parody's Genesis 2:2 close, the block mined on 2010-12-12, the day of Satoshi's last public post. (Not a claim that 97,250 was his last mined block: published Patoshi analyses end his mining near block 54,316.)\"",
|
|
"category": "archive_fix",
|
|
"decision": "approve",
|
|
"rule": {
|
|
"category": "archive_fix",
|
|
"decision": "article-grounded correction",
|
|
"decision_detail": "article-grounded correction published to the live page"
|
|
}
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": 12,
|
|
"source": "pending",
|
|
"summary": "Archive fix: magazine-041 calls it 'Stackchain's rowdiest fork war'",
|
|
"evidence": "Flag 4 of 7. Grade: overstated.\n\nSummary clause (IPE): \"Stackchain's rowdiest fork war\".\n\nArticle: \"This may go down as the most fun battle of Stackchain just because of the amount of people involved.\" - \"most fun\" is supported; \"rowdiest\" is the archive's superlative, not stated.\n\nProposed correction: \"Stackchain's most fun battle\".",
|
|
"category": "archive_fix",
|
|
"decision": "approve",
|
|
"rule": {
|
|
"category": "archive_fix",
|
|
"decision": "article-grounded correction",
|
|
"decision_detail": "article-grounded correction published to the live page"
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
} |